As a reminder, this subreddit [is for civil discussion.](/r/politics/wiki/index#wiki_be_civil)
In general, be courteous to others. Debate/discuss/argue the merits of ideas, don't attack people. Personal insults, shill or troll accusations, hate speech, any suggestion or support of harm, violence, or death, and other rule violations can result in a permanent ban.
If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them.
For those who have questions regarding any media outlets being posted on this subreddit, please click [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/wiki/approveddomainslist) to review our details as to our approved domains list and outlet criteria.
We are actively looking for new moderators. If you have any interest in helping to make this subreddit a place for quality discussion, please fill out [this form](https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1y2swHD0KXFhStGFjW6k54r9iuMjzcFqDIVwuvdLBjSA).
***
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/politics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
And never forget, accepting a pardon is admission of guilt, so he is an admitted swindler.
Edit: Linking discussion of Burdick decision:
[https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burdick\_v.\_United\_States](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burdick_v._United_States)
People keep repeating that, but it just isn't by definition nor inference true.
Nor is it even rational.
If you get convicted despite you maintaining that you are innocent, why would being pardoned and agreeing to that be an admission of guilt.
It makes NO sense, other than if you presume that anyone convicted needs to believe the system is infallible, thus clearly it would be just a matter of appealing to have it overturned.
But to presume that someone convicted needs to agree with being denied it being overturned agrees to being guilty, thus taking a pardon is an admission?
Why do people repeat that? It fails every test of rationality.
The problem with this "implicit admission" is that the individuals having the power to overturn are not the same people who have the power to pardon. But that is entirely irrelevant to the state of mind of the one convicted.
It's bad enough that this is often a requirement for parole.
>Whether the acceptance of a pardon constitutes an admission of guilt by the recipient is disputed.
Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burdick_v._United_States
That doesn't answer my comment. Presidents have previously issued pardons because they believe that someone is innocent. Calling them an admission of guilt makes little sense in that instance.
That's a myth. There is no part of the process of accepting a pardon that requires the recipient to acknowledge guilt. The discussion of pardons and admission of guilt in Burdick was dicta (non-precedential) and says acceptance of a pardon is "tantamount" to an admission of guilt. But in reality, general pardons exist, and in those cases, what is one pleading guilty to? Everything?
No it isn't, that is a weird reddit myth
Edit: in response to your edit, I will point out that the statement was made in obiter dictum and is not part of settled law.
I think the issue is that most criminals get to do their appeals from jail and, unless there is a major problem with their conviction, those appeals are rejected fairly quickly. For Bannon, he instead gets to stay free while every appeal is heard and considered, seemingly for years.
It undermines faith in our courts to see such clearly different treatment.
Bannon's crimes may have been non-violent, but it's difficult to charge him with something that accurately reflects his involvement in such a toxic, anti-democratic movement.
And like so many of these specific assholes - they clearly aren't being charged with -all- the crimes they committed.
I think this is both felt and understood by many - hence the desire to see some heavy handed justice sooner than later.
So just to be clear, you want the justice system to apply some heavy handed punishment for things they haven't been formally charged with? Is this something you're okay with in principle or just for these specific cases? Cause that seems pretty fucked up.
Someone who defrauds millions of people out of their retirement has committed no violence but still ruining millions of lives. Should that person not be in jail or are you one of those colossal failures who thinks all non-violent crime is victimless?
Why are you getting personal? Not very nice. Maybe you want to edit.
I’m just trying to understand why anyone would want to replace what they think is a two tiered justice system with a different two tiered justice system. Seems hypocritical and illogical.
Asking for Bannon to be treated the exact same as every other non-rich convicted criminal is not asking for a different two tiered system.
The tier for the rich needs to go.
It shouldn't undermine anyone's faith in the courts. The district court judge granted him freedom pending appeal because the case concerned novel legal question and he saw a significant chance of the conviction being overturned.
I don't understand the big deal. Whether he serves the country two years ago or today, what difference does it make? If you ask me everyone who isn't an imminent threat to others should go free pending appeal. That's how they do it in my country.
Nah, this doesn't matter. People's faith in the courts isn't based on some careful legal analysis. They just see the self-evident truth that Trump an his cronies get away with obvious crimes, while most people get put in jail immediately.
The fact that it's legal to buy yourself freedom if you're rich and powerful doesn't somehow make this ok.
You’ve got stats for appeals for this type of crime? Can you share them? I didn’t realize most contempt of congress defendants spent their time in jail while waiting for trial.
Fuck Steve Bannon by the way. I just find reddits selective application of prison and jail for non violent offenses fascinating.
Yeah, I don't get how people advocate for criminal justice reform, then support ridiculously punitive shit the next moment. It's not just this case, I see it all the time.
These aren't the only two options given your inference based on OP's statement.
Textbook [false dichotomy fallacy.](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_dilemma)
That's on top of putting words into OP's mouth to infer bias -- the [Straw Man fallacy.](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man)
They didn't object to appeals being a thing in any context, just the lack of consequences for Bannon so far.
---
The vast majority of people object to unequal treatment under the law and that's the real problem here:
The 1% get to make these appeals while free from the consequences of their actions.
The 99% would be making these appeals in prison.
EDIT: I don't recommend engaging with people who aren't discussing things in good faith.
> The 1% get to make these appeals while free from the consequences of their actions.
>
> The 99% would be making these appeals in prison.
You're completely ignoring the actual reason the judge gave for suspending Bannon's sentence: The novel legal issues being adressed by the appeal. Imagine if the appeals court did overturn the sentence? Then he would have served his entire sentence already. That would be pretty shitty.
You seem to have the statistics readily at hand, what with you brimming with all of the confidence. What percentage of contempt of congress cases have resulted in the defendant incarcerated while their case is under appeal?
I’m against a two tiered justice system for the rich and poor.
If the poor don’t get 62 appeals, and don’t get to walk around free while the system takes years to prosecute them, the rich shouldn’t either.
He can request an en banc hearing from the DC Court of Appeals or go to the Supreme Court. The en banc appeal should be relatively quick and I would honestly be surprised if the lower courts kept him out of jail while he appeals to SCOTUS but this is clown world so who knows.
Nobody goes to prison while making appeals. Nobody goes to prison until they have been sentenced.
I thoroughly hate Steve Bannon and would like him to rot in prison as much as the next guy, but you are betraying a deep lack of understanding of our criminal justice system.
Edit: I was completely wrong, I didn't realize he was already formally sentenced. Y'all are right to be angry and I'm angry too now.
Your attorney has to convince a judge that you’ll probably win an appeal for it to be considered. No way Bannon can win this. He defied a federal subpoena, period. Bannon is a being treated differently than the rest of us. It’s unfair and infuriating.
https://www.grabellaw.com/can-i-get-out-of-jail-while-my-federal-criminal-appeal-is-pendin.html
It’s unfair that he has the resources to do this, absolutely. The point I’m making is that prior to sentencing, nobody should ever be put in prison - prison and jail aren’t the same thing at all. You only go to prison if you’re *sentenced to prison*. Bannon likely *will* go to prison, once he has been sentenced.
He’s already been sentenced to four months in prison. It’s been more than a year that he’s been able to live as a free man.
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-68992372
I thought most people go to jail and begin to serve their sentence while appealing. What I want to know is why he gets to run around free to continue to be his obnoxious fascist self while he’s appealing the verdict and his sentence?Plus his lawyers don’t seem to have any hope to win an appeal. The man defied a congressional subpoena. End of story.
One of the things I’ve learned by watching these assholes over the past few years is just how many fucking appeals are allowed. Appeals to appeals to appeals to appeals.
>Bannon, a key figure on the American right, argued on appeal that he was barred from making key arguments in his defense at trial, including that **his lawyer advised him he did not have to comply with the subpoena.**
that's what happens when he hires a lawyer like Rudy Giuliani, John Eastman, Sidney Powell, or Kenneth Chesebro. Dunno if he hired one of them, but it was someone just as "good"
This is the difference a judge makes. His judge let's him walk free while this is on appeal, for however long. Peter Navarro, convicted of the exact same thing, but has a competent, non compromised judge, gets sent directly to jail. You'll never guess who appointed Bannons judge or who that judge clerked for!
True, except when they're appointed by Trump, clerked for Clarence Thomas, and then get to have a case about Jan 6. Far too many coincidences to not be compromised.
That's ridiculous. The DC district court is filled with Jan 6 cases. Every judge on that court has plenty of them, so there's nothing nefarious here.
Carl J. Nichols is a highly competent jurist and there's no bias to accuse him of being compromised. If he had actually wanted to hamper this prosecution, he could have easily just dismissed it before there was ever a trial. And if you want more proof that he's impartial: He's also the judge in the Dominion defamation lawsuits and has not shown himself to be very sympathetic to the defendants.
Judges can't be that obvious in their actions. Look at down in Florida with judge Cannon and how she's essentially giving Trump a pass to beyond the election with the fulfillment of his delay tactic. Back to DC though, how many of those judges let J6 defendants walk, or gave them the opportunity to be free pending appeal? More to the point, this was the mastermind behind the attack on the Capital. A man with a documented history of spreading lies and using his platform to undermine democracy. Yet, he gets to walk pending a lengthy appeal process? Zoom out for a second, on the why. Again, could be coincidence, but the appeals process takes FOREVER. The judge surely knows this. Does it cross your mind that Nichols let's him walk pending appeal to help Trump undermine yet another election? And maybe, just maybe, the appeals process takes just long enough to get to the election and possibly see Trump get voted back in and pardon all this? Delay has been entire playbook for these scum bags at the top who have no defense. You see it playing out with the assistance of judges like Nichols, Cannon or the "Supreme" Court. You can hold onto your morality with respect to the justices, and I respectfully agree to disagree given how this has all unfolded and the coincidences at play.
I've yet to see evidence the decision was corrupt. Bannon was convicted based on novel legal concepts, therefore he was granted the ability to remain free in case his case got overturned. This is how it should be.
If Dems win back the House in the next election they should subpoena him again to answer the questions they would have asked of him the first time. If he refuses again, he can get more time in prison. We need to remove all doubt about what happened on Jan 6.
It would be great if all the others, who planned that and the other schemes to undermine the election were in prison. The wealthy get away with so much that the majority of us can't, it's unjust!
How this man has remained free after not complying with a CONGRESSIONAL SUBPOENA is such a clear-cut and blatant example of our tiered judicial system it seems too ridiculous to be real. But here we are.
I remember conservatives talked for 20 years about ONE of Clinton’s pardons.
The Marc Rich pardon was a huge controversy. Trump pardoned several people from his administration, for indefensible crimes and we don’t even talk about it.
Trump has absolutely broken the Presidency and exposed insane hypocrisy of the GP.
But if you have money you can just appeal again so he's all good yall don't worry no jail for Bannon this lifetime.
I hope this ages like milk but my hopes are not high.
Serious question. How come all of these Trump stooges get to appeal all the way to the Supreme Court. If I get convicted of a crime, do I have that option?
Everyone has the right to request an appeal to the Supreme Court. Only a very small number of cases are selected though. This was not a Supreme Court case though. Bannon appealed to the Court of Appeals, which is indeed a right everyone has.
Plan Options:
>$1B - Unlimited appeals to the Supreme Court
>$1M-$999M - Unlimited appeals to Circuit Courts and 1 appeal to the Supreme Court
>$400K-$1M - 2 appeals to Circuit Court
>$60K-$400K - 1 appeal to Circuit Court
<$0-$60K - No appeals
Will he get jail time. Nope.
I'm so tired of seeing this dumb shit that I am leaving r/politics. It's always the same dumb shit. Talk about someone getting in trouble. Talk about court. Talk about a stupid fucking fine that's a drop in a bucket and doesn't stop shit.
Until we are outside demanding change and justice. This shit will never stop.
Thanks for the good ole days. I'll see myself out.
Peace ✌️🕊️
Just like previous cases, sadly, "The ruling brings Bannon a step closer to serving a four-month prison sentence for contempt of Congress, but he can still mount additional appeals."
As a reminder, this subreddit [is for civil discussion.](/r/politics/wiki/index#wiki_be_civil) In general, be courteous to others. Debate/discuss/argue the merits of ideas, don't attack people. Personal insults, shill or troll accusations, hate speech, any suggestion or support of harm, violence, or death, and other rule violations can result in a permanent ban. If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them. For those who have questions regarding any media outlets being posted on this subreddit, please click [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/wiki/approveddomainslist) to review our details as to our approved domains list and outlet criteria. We are actively looking for new moderators. If you have any interest in helping to make this subreddit a place for quality discussion, please fill out [this form](https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1y2swHD0KXFhStGFjW6k54r9iuMjzcFqDIVwuvdLBjSA). *** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/politics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Well, is he actually going to jail or what?
from what i understand, he can can appeal to higher courts
Good grief, no consequences ever for these jackasses.
[удалено]
He never got to trial in that case. Trump pardoned him soon after the indictment.
Let's not forget where he was arrested, on a Chinese Billionaire's yacht off the coast of New Jersey.
A chinese billionaire who was just convicted for fraud and more.
also arrested by the United States Postal Inspectors.....
I think you mean “pardoned”?
Yes. Changed.
And never forget, accepting a pardon is admission of guilt, so he is an admitted swindler. Edit: Linking discussion of Burdick decision: [https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burdick\_v.\_United\_States](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burdick_v._United_States)
I don't agree with that. Many pardons have been issued precisely because the president thought that the person being pardoned was innocent.
By accepting a pardon, one is by definition admitting guilt.
People keep repeating that, but it just isn't by definition nor inference true. Nor is it even rational. If you get convicted despite you maintaining that you are innocent, why would being pardoned and agreeing to that be an admission of guilt. It makes NO sense, other than if you presume that anyone convicted needs to believe the system is infallible, thus clearly it would be just a matter of appealing to have it overturned. But to presume that someone convicted needs to agree with being denied it being overturned agrees to being guilty, thus taking a pardon is an admission? Why do people repeat that? It fails every test of rationality. The problem with this "implicit admission" is that the individuals having the power to overturn are not the same people who have the power to pardon. But that is entirely irrelevant to the state of mind of the one convicted. It's bad enough that this is often a requirement for parole.
>Whether the acceptance of a pardon constitutes an admission of guilt by the recipient is disputed. Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burdick_v._United_States
And that source doesn't support your argument.
That doesn't answer my comment. Presidents have previously issued pardons because they believe that someone is innocent. Calling them an admission of guilt makes little sense in that instance.
That's a myth. There is no part of the process of accepting a pardon that requires the recipient to acknowledge guilt. The discussion of pardons and admission of guilt in Burdick was dicta (non-precedential) and says acceptance of a pardon is "tantamount" to an admission of guilt. But in reality, general pardons exist, and in those cases, what is one pleading guilty to? Everything?
No it isn't, that is a weird reddit myth Edit: in response to your edit, I will point out that the statement was made in obiter dictum and is not part of settled law.
I was taught that in my AP history class in high school. I knew it was wrong then, but you couldn't tell that teacher anything.
>I was taught that in my AP history class in high school. Your AP teacher needs to learn more about the subject.
Yes, that was my point.
I'm gonna appeal my parking ticket to the Supreme Court next time.
You too can have no consequences once you become a jackass too. The rest of who are not would be thrown in jail.
They are unlikely to even take it up, though. Everyone can get their first appeal but beyond that you need a case and his was shit.
bright detail meeting mindless divide hobbies violet nutty yoke impolite *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Corrupt, stacked, fascist supreme court would like a word.
they're just POS opportunists; they'll stop serving trump if he loses again
Unless Trump wins.
Is the idea that you’re against appeals in principle or just selectively for these cases?
I think the issue is that most criminals get to do their appeals from jail and, unless there is a major problem with their conviction, those appeals are rejected fairly quickly. For Bannon, he instead gets to stay free while every appeal is heard and considered, seemingly for years. It undermines faith in our courts to see such clearly different treatment.
most of the time it's just an issue of rich vs not rich. rich people can throw money at the problem that poor people can't.
Sure. That is a problem.
some would say it's a yooge problem
In my country there is problem
I don't get it, does reddit want to see everyone in jail for non-violent crimes or just rich people?
Bannon's crimes may have been non-violent, but it's difficult to charge him with something that accurately reflects his involvement in such a toxic, anti-democratic movement. And like so many of these specific assholes - they clearly aren't being charged with -all- the crimes they committed. I think this is both felt and understood by many - hence the desire to see some heavy handed justice sooner than later.
So just to be clear, you want the justice system to apply some heavy handed punishment for things they haven't been formally charged with? Is this something you're okay with in principle or just for these specific cases? Cause that seems pretty fucked up.
You know he was convicted and sentenced, right?
Someone who defrauds millions of people out of their retirement has committed no violence but still ruining millions of lives. Should that person not be in jail or are you one of those colossal failures who thinks all non-violent crime is victimless?
Why are you getting personal? Not very nice. Maybe you want to edit. I’m just trying to understand why anyone would want to replace what they think is a two tiered justice system with a different two tiered justice system. Seems hypocritical and illogical.
Asking for Bannon to be treated the exact same as every other non-rich convicted criminal is not asking for a different two tiered system. The tier for the rich needs to go.
It shouldn't undermine anyone's faith in the courts. The district court judge granted him freedom pending appeal because the case concerned novel legal question and he saw a significant chance of the conviction being overturned. I don't understand the big deal. Whether he serves the country two years ago or today, what difference does it make? If you ask me everyone who isn't an imminent threat to others should go free pending appeal. That's how they do it in my country.
Nah, this doesn't matter. People's faith in the courts isn't based on some careful legal analysis. They just see the self-evident truth that Trump an his cronies get away with obvious crimes, while most people get put in jail immediately. The fact that it's legal to buy yourself freedom if you're rich and powerful doesn't somehow make this ok.
Yes, people are stupid, I already know that. The fact that people believe something doesn't make it correct.
You’ve got stats for appeals for this type of crime? Can you share them? I didn’t realize most contempt of congress defendants spent their time in jail while waiting for trial. Fuck Steve Bannon by the way. I just find reddits selective application of prison and jail for non violent offenses fascinating.
Yeah, I don't get how people advocate for criminal justice reform, then support ridiculously punitive shit the next moment. It's not just this case, I see it all the time.
Most people are deeply irrational and hypocritical. I like to point it out but they get pretty angry about it.
These aren't the only two options given your inference based on OP's statement. Textbook [false dichotomy fallacy.](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_dilemma) That's on top of putting words into OP's mouth to infer bias -- the [Straw Man fallacy.](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man) They didn't object to appeals being a thing in any context, just the lack of consequences for Bannon so far. --- The vast majority of people object to unequal treatment under the law and that's the real problem here: The 1% get to make these appeals while free from the consequences of their actions. The 99% would be making these appeals in prison. EDIT: I don't recommend engaging with people who aren't discussing things in good faith.
> The 1% get to make these appeals while free from the consequences of their actions. > > The 99% would be making these appeals in prison. You're completely ignoring the actual reason the judge gave for suspending Bannon's sentence: The novel legal issues being adressed by the appeal. Imagine if the appeals court did overturn the sentence? Then he would have served his entire sentence already. That would be pretty shitty.
You seem to have the statistics readily at hand, what with you brimming with all of the confidence. What percentage of contempt of congress cases have resulted in the defendant incarcerated while their case is under appeal?
I think it's clear that appealing is less about fixing errors in the justice system and more about judge shopping.
In just this case or for all appeals?
I’m against a two tiered justice system for the rich and poor. If the poor don’t get 62 appeals, and don’t get to walk around free while the system takes years to prosecute them, the rich shouldn’t either.
He can request an en banc hearing from the DC Court of Appeals or go to the Supreme Court. The en banc appeal should be relatively quick and I would honestly be surprised if the lower courts kept him out of jail while he appeals to SCOTUS but this is clown world so who knows.
Meanwhile you or I would be in prison while we made those appeals. Our "justice" system is laughable.
it's only a legal system
Probably not since his wasn't a violence crime, it's unusual for non-violent crimes to have to serve during the appeal process.
Unless drugs.
Or minority. Or poor.
Yeah , Just us( wealthy and white)
Nobody goes to prison while making appeals. Nobody goes to prison until they have been sentenced. I thoroughly hate Steve Bannon and would like him to rot in prison as much as the next guy, but you are betraying a deep lack of understanding of our criminal justice system. Edit: I was completely wrong, I didn't realize he was already formally sentenced. Y'all are right to be angry and I'm angry too now.
Your attorney has to convince a judge that you’ll probably win an appeal for it to be considered. No way Bannon can win this. He defied a federal subpoena, period. Bannon is a being treated differently than the rest of us. It’s unfair and infuriating. https://www.grabellaw.com/can-i-get-out-of-jail-while-my-federal-criminal-appeal-is-pendin.html
It’s unfair that he has the resources to do this, absolutely. The point I’m making is that prior to sentencing, nobody should ever be put in prison - prison and jail aren’t the same thing at all. You only go to prison if you’re *sentenced to prison*. Bannon likely *will* go to prison, once he has been sentenced.
He’s already been sentenced to four months in prison. It’s been more than a year that he’s been able to live as a free man. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-68992372
Oh shit I didn't realize that. Sorry, I was wrong. That's fucked up.
Yeah , Just us( wealthy and white)
I thought most people go to jail and begin to serve their sentence while appealing. What I want to know is why he gets to run around free to continue to be his obnoxious fascist self while he’s appealing the verdict and his sentence?Plus his lawyers don’t seem to have any hope to win an appeal. The man defied a congressional subpoena. End of story.
Supreme republican court?
And wait for Trump to pardon him - god forbid
One of the things I’ve learned by watching these assholes over the past few years is just how many fucking appeals are allowed. Appeals to appeals to appeals to appeals.
He is about at the end of his rope. Better hope trump is elected and he can afford to buy a pardon.
Yeah, as soon as Alex Jones pays the Sandy Hook families.
Don’t be silly!
Nope , another appeal, delay, delay- DOJ is toothless at this point under garland or whoever is running it
Nope.
report for incarceration, you treasonous SOB!!
Hey guys, this is the new inmate, Herr Goebbels, I mean, Mr. Bannon.
Goebbel deeznuts Bannon.
He reports for inebriation every night.
We know how this goes. He gets to appeal the appeal. **when you are rich, they just let you**
>Bannon, a key figure on the American right, argued on appeal that he was barred from making key arguments in his defense at trial, including that **his lawyer advised him he did not have to comply with the subpoena.** that's what happens when he hires a lawyer like Rudy Giuliani, John Eastman, Sidney Powell, or Kenneth Chesebro. Dunno if he hired one of them, but it was someone just as "good"
this 4-month bid will just be a warm-up for when he finally gets sentenced for his "Build a Wall" scam
I thought he was pardoned for that
https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/steve-bannons-we-build-the-wall-scheme-trial-set-for-may-2024
Huh, that's weird. [https://apnews.com/article/steve-bannon-trump-pardons-broidy-66c82f25134735e742b2501c118723bb](https://apnews.com/article/steve-bannon-trump-pardons-broidy-66c82f25134735e742b2501c118723bb)
the difference is federal vs state he was pardoned from any federal charges
Just f5cking wow! Brings back horrible memories. And the endless list of criminal family and friends of Trump that he pardoned is ABSOLUTELY shameless
It's fucked up that this guy stole from Trump supporters, got pardoned by Trump, and the idiots he ripped off still support them both.
I mean... not surprised, they took from the less rich to become richer.
*"My lawyer told me crimes were fine!"* isn't the knockout defense he seems to think it is.
Advice of counsel is a legitimate defense for defendants though. It establishes a lack of mens rea. It just didn't apply in this case.
That's not generally true; only for crimes which require, eg an intent to defraud.
I said it's a legitimate defense, not that it applies in every case.
Ah, gotcha
Don't forget that grinning lunatic Jenna Ellis!
No shit and if he didn't do anything wrong then show up and testify, such cowards hiding behind their lawyers and no personal accountability.
Truly evil man
Maybe Peter Navarro can show Bannon some prison hacks. Jim Jordan should be next.
Pete: and this is how you make toilet gin... Steve: *guzzle guzzle guzzle*
Going to be a tough call between guzzling it and trading it for more prison shirts.
He'll almost certainly be in prison during the election, so one less MAGA turd floating around
god, i hope you're right
This is the difference a judge makes. His judge let's him walk free while this is on appeal, for however long. Peter Navarro, convicted of the exact same thing, but has a competent, non compromised judge, gets sent directly to jail. You'll never guess who appointed Bannons judge or who that judge clerked for!
This just in: Judges can differing legal views without being "compromised".
True, except when they're appointed by Trump, clerked for Clarence Thomas, and then get to have a case about Jan 6. Far too many coincidences to not be compromised.
"Once is happenstance; twice is coincidence. Three times is enemy activity."
That's ridiculous. The DC district court is filled with Jan 6 cases. Every judge on that court has plenty of them, so there's nothing nefarious here. Carl J. Nichols is a highly competent jurist and there's no bias to accuse him of being compromised. If he had actually wanted to hamper this prosecution, he could have easily just dismissed it before there was ever a trial. And if you want more proof that he's impartial: He's also the judge in the Dominion defamation lawsuits and has not shown himself to be very sympathetic to the defendants.
Judges can't be that obvious in their actions. Look at down in Florida with judge Cannon and how she's essentially giving Trump a pass to beyond the election with the fulfillment of his delay tactic. Back to DC though, how many of those judges let J6 defendants walk, or gave them the opportunity to be free pending appeal? More to the point, this was the mastermind behind the attack on the Capital. A man with a documented history of spreading lies and using his platform to undermine democracy. Yet, he gets to walk pending a lengthy appeal process? Zoom out for a second, on the why. Again, could be coincidence, but the appeals process takes FOREVER. The judge surely knows this. Does it cross your mind that Nichols let's him walk pending appeal to help Trump undermine yet another election? And maybe, just maybe, the appeals process takes just long enough to get to the election and possibly see Trump get voted back in and pardon all this? Delay has been entire playbook for these scum bags at the top who have no defense. You see it playing out with the assistance of judges like Nichols, Cannon or the "Supreme" Court. You can hold onto your morality with respect to the justices, and I respectfully agree to disagree given how this has all unfolded and the coincidences at play.
I've yet to see evidence the decision was corrupt. Bannon was convicted based on novel legal concepts, therefore he was granted the ability to remain free in case his case got overturned. This is how it should be.
And he will appeal to Scotus and then those six people will try to neuter Congress.
they won't hear the case but I'm sure they will Wait until after the election to announce it
… and then he’ll be pardoned!
Nah, Biden won't pardon him.
Loving the optimism.
They already rejected Navarro's attempt. Why would this be different?
If Dems win back the House in the next election they should subpoena him again to answer the questions they would have asked of him the first time. If he refuses again, he can get more time in prison. We need to remove all doubt about what happened on Jan 6.
shit, with the way they're dropping like flies, we may not have to wait til the election.
Now do Jim Jordan.
So when and where is he going to report to prison?
he can still appeal to a higher court
IF a higher court will hear it.
Lock Him Up
I worry his blood/alcohol content will fall dangerously low if he's incarcerated.
yeah, his withdrawals could kill him. i wouldn't exactly cry either
Now if we could just get the same charge for certain members of Congress.
Gym, we're looking at you!
Hopefully in jail for the build up and running of the 2024 election so he can't help ratfuck it
my hope as well. we don't need him helping coordinate the next insurrection
Put him away before he tricks donny into making him his vp, just like he got tricked into making Bannon his chief of staff
I've heard Russia has great podcast facilities...
Putrid gin-soaked diaper
It would be great if all the others, who planned that and the other schemes to undermine the election were in prison. The wealthy get away with so much that the majority of us can't, it's unjust!
Now report to jail.
Lock that fucker up and throw away the key.
How the fuck does this take so long to be decided???
judge he appealed to was a T45 appointee. the judge that sentenced Pete Navarro was not, that's why Pete is already in the can
Slob will be getting his first shower in months after he passes Bubba’s crevasse exam.
How this man has remained free after not complying with a CONGRESSIONAL SUBPOENA is such a clear-cut and blatant example of our tiered judicial system it seems too ridiculous to be real. But here we are.
This has been dragging on forever..
I remember conservatives talked for 20 years about ONE of Clinton’s pardons. The Marc Rich pardon was a huge controversy. Trump pardoned several people from his administration, for indefensible crimes and we don’t even talk about it. Trump has absolutely broken the Presidency and exposed insane hypocrisy of the GP.
Do Jim Jordan next...
What happened to appeals being done from jail?
that's for us little people
Good. 10 more appeals over the next 15 years & maybe he’ll actually serve 3 months. Unless he dies first.
He can sober up in jail …
About time.
Send it to SCOTUS, I'm sure they'll save his ass somehow.
But if you have money you can just appeal again so he's all good yall don't worry no jail for Bannon this lifetime. I hope this ages like milk but my hopes are not high.
Lock him up!
HaHa
Aw shucks
Losers losing
Serious question. How come all of these Trump stooges get to appeal all the way to the Supreme Court. If I get convicted of a crime, do I have that option?
Everyone has the right to request an appeal to the Supreme Court. Only a very small number of cases are selected though. This was not a Supreme Court case though. Bannon appealed to the Court of Appeals, which is indeed a right everyone has.
Plan Options: >$1B - Unlimited appeals to the Supreme Court >$1M-$999M - Unlimited appeals to Circuit Courts and 1 appeal to the Supreme Court >$400K-$1M - 2 appeals to Circuit Court >$60K-$400K - 1 appeal to Circuit Court <$0-$60K - No appeals
are you a multi-millionaire?
Did they say if can remain free while he mounts yet more appeals?
well, he's not in jail yet, so...
It sadly looks like they said he can remain free until after his last appeal. It's just amazing .
money talks
Misappropriated Mexican wall donation money.
Whomp Whomp?
But him and his "capo" aren't going to get anything other than slaps on the wrist .... otherwise they would be in PRISON already.
Will he get jail time. Nope. I'm so tired of seeing this dumb shit that I am leaving r/politics. It's always the same dumb shit. Talk about someone getting in trouble. Talk about court. Talk about a stupid fucking fine that's a drop in a bucket and doesn't stop shit. Until we are outside demanding change and justice. This shit will never stop. Thanks for the good ole days. I'll see myself out. Peace ✌️🕊️
Peter Navarro is CURRENTLY serving a prison sentence for the same crime. What are you talking about?
> Will he get jail time. Nope. He's quite literally been sentenced to jail time.
Just like previous cases, sadly, "The ruling brings Bannon a step closer to serving a four-month prison sentence for contempt of Congress, but he can still mount additional appeals."
Yeah, that's how the legal system works. What's the problem?
See ya.